A Conceptual Framework for Incorporation of Composting in Closed-Loop Urban Controlled Environment Agriculture
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlled environment agriculture (CEA), specifically advanced greenhouses, plant factories, and vertical farms, has a significant role to play in the urban agri-food landscape through provision of fresh and nutritious food for urban populations. With the push towards improving sustainability of these systems, a circular or closed-loop approach for managing resources is desirable. These crop production systems generate biowaste in the form of crop and growing substrate residues, the disposal of which not only impacts the immediate environment, but also represents a loss of valuable resources. Closing the resource loop through composting of crop residues and urban biowaste is presented. Composting allows for the recovery of carbon dioxide and plant nutrients that can be reused as inputs for crop production, while also providing a mechanism for managing and valorizing biowastes. A conceptual framework for integrating carbon dioxide and nutrient recovery through composting in a CEA system is described along with potential environmental benefits over conventional inputs. Challenges involved in the recovery and reuse of each component, as well as possible solutions, are discussed. Supplementary technologies such as biofiltration, bioponics, ozonation, and electrochemical oxidation are presented as means to overcome some operational challenges. Gaps in research are identified and future research directions are proposed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it